I vote Stalin.He was probably the best politician of all times, not only Sovie Union.He have to deal with a big invasion, traitors, "change a country".He was a great person.Obviously, he doesn´t kill 20 millions:lol: thats a nazi lie.Kruschev was the worst with their lies about Stalin.Lenin was a great man too.

Although Stalin made his contributions he also headed with Nikolai Yezhov the massive purge of all experienced Soviet high ranking military staff and replaced them with idiots like Budyonii and Voroshilov who themselves caused the massive casualties during the winter war and operation barbarossa. Not to mention that Stalin ignored all warnings of a german attack in 1941.

None of them. Under Soviet rule Russia failed to take advantage of vast natural resources it has (extremely fertile soils, natural resources). If she was ruled by normal people, she would be as rich as Canada or even Norway.

If I had, I would have chosen Gorbachev. He tried to reform the country but it was too late, collapse of USSR was inevitable by then.

dino00 wrote:I vote Stalin.He was probably the best politician of all times, not only Sovie Union.He have to deal with a big invasion, traitors, "change a country".He was a great person.Obviously, he doesn´t kill 20 millions:lol: thats a nazi lie.Kruschev was the worst with their lies about Stalin.Lenin was a great man too.

I know it's Your opinion, but...Nice to know that Russians can be called traitors of their country by Portuguese poster. But what do I expect, Soviet union wasn't ruled by Russians. It was controlled by anthropic Georgian and bunch of Jews and other lucky opportunists that were always struggling for power. You couldn't see jew or georgian in gulag, no no, it was Russians, Polish, Lithuanians, Latvians and etc... Ukraine was starving but Odessa Jews there always had butter, bread and milk. Even Mafia was all jewish there.Soviet union was Russo-centric and yet their bones fertilised all Siberia.

I'm not anti-semitic or anti-georgian, but out of over 500 members of Bolshevik state, over 400 were Jewish. 35 Latvians, Lithuanians.. And 12... Russians.

The traitors was to trotsky and "friends", but i don´t see a problem in a Portuguese to call a Russian traitor, and kruschev was also one, he lie about Stalin, and lie about Russians if you want.I have great respect for the Russians.If anyone, from other country call a Portuguese president a traitor i don´t have any problem(especialy the present one).

If You want to worship Stalin - it's Your choice. But You really can't call Russian people traitors as You clearly have no understanding what was like to live in Stalinist country. People were stuck between hammer and anvil. Even Vlasov army soldiers were left with no choice, they weren't typical traitors if You think about it.Would You call Sergei Korolev a traitor? Really?Or Alksnis?

My opinion about Stalin is very negative. After his death people were rehabilitated for a reason. Life for people started to better and better after his demise. You can call Khrushov how You want, but he was part of an important change.Early life of Jughashvili could be compared to Syrian rebel of today. Revolutionaries from these parts were kidnapping people, robbing banks, using terrorist attacks. By today standards he was Caucasian terrorist. Imagine Kadyrov now becoming Russian president. He was terrorist too.

Only Georgian or really clueless person can respect Stalin. It's up to You

Stalin needed a new "Ruling a country for dummies" book that might teach him how to lead by inspiration rather than the threat of death.

I think there were probably several million other Soviet people who could have done the same job much better than Stalin did.

Of course our opinions change nothing, but we should be careful of those who remember some things and forget others.

Stalin was a prick, but a better choice than the German alternative offered in the early 1940s.

Stalin was Germany's best ally on the Soviet side.

Not really... if Stalin hadn't driven the Soviet Union through the industrial phase the lend lease program would have resulted in the Soviets receiving lots of vehicles and material they had no idea how to maintain and operate and the west would likely have had to move D day to 1942 and suffered much heavier losses in dealing the Germany.

We can debate the Ifs about Soviet modernization plans versus what would have happened without, or specifically without STalin's idiotic leadership, but that is too difficult to asses.

In terms of the War, from 1941 on, Stalin is responsible for the USSR quite actually suffering millions more casualties that it needed to. There is no denying this, the man was a monster and an absolute catastrophe for the USSR war effort.

You are very right that there were millions of people who probably would have done a better job- hell, anyone who would have just shut up and let the military do its job already would have been a light-year ahead of Stalin!

Stalin supported Nazi Germany because he had his own plans regarding the future of Europe. Without his assistance Germans wouldn't have been able to build a strong army. Nazi economy looked strong on paper but in the reality it was a disaster - during invasion of Poland they used almost all available ammo and fuel, without soviet resources they wouldn't have conquered France.

Fortunately not everything worked as he expected - Stalin expected that French campaign will be longer and much more bloody for Germans. If it was so, he would have rushed forward to "liberate" Europe.

Actually it was war against French AND English, and yes he expected them to exaust on each other. He already had poland ,and got parts of romania, and lost to finland. Not much more he could "liberate"...Very good i would have given you a plus vote ,but i cant vote for a long time at all...

The USSR tried hard to get anti-German coalition with the Western Allies during the mid 30s, but was basically ignored. Turning to Germany was the logical move.THeir cooperation during 20s, before Hitler became Chancellor also was fairly logical, as both were outcasts in Europe, especially militarily.

Unfortunately the French folded fast, and coupled with Stalin's ineptitude in both preparations and actual wartime conduct, the USSR ended up absorbing the greatest cost of the war with Germany.

Western countries didnt want to cooperate with communists who tried to expand their sphere of influence in central europe anyway.Stalin expected a war actually but a few years latter and with weak germany.And it as it turned out it was a wrong tactic which failed spectacularly and with tremendous costs for Ussr.

Had Germany been confronted with a focused Soviet-British-French force, they would have been checked well before war broke out across Europe. France need not have been humiliated and occupied.

Stalin knew war was coming, one of the few times he was realistic and right. He just bungled the USSRs entry into it.

France and Britain definitely missed a chance to cooperate with the USSR. Litvinov tried hard to broker something, but was dismissed. Of course, Polish opposition was a major factor, and quite frankly understandable.

AT the end of the day Germany overreached itself, so it was the biggest miscalculator of them all.

Stalin wanted to do what Britain eventually did... sit on the sidelines while two enemies savaged each other and wore each other down.

He didn't get the chance, but that does not make him any different from the British who practised that policy or the US who had a similar policy of supply rather than intervention.

The Soviets traded with Nazi Germany just like it traded with many other countries... WWII hadn't happened yet and there was no reason to refuse to sell products and raw materials to a country that was prepared to buy them.

The good relationship between Germany and Russia ended in 1933 when Hitler took power.

The nonaggression pact or rippentropp molotov pact was a non aggression pact... not something between allies... the US and UK don't have a non aggression pact... they don't need one.

Well no one tells You that You have to become slave of a bank. AFAIK Borrowing culture isn't that bad in Russia.

But to call Gorbi a best leader... Well he wasn't evil like Stalin or stupid like Yelcin. Soviet Union collapse was inevitable. He was like pilot of a plane that was about to hit the ground. What ever he tried to do - it failed. He made Soviet union collapse as gently as possible and Tom Clancy theories went down the drain. Some people dislike him because he sold Russia to Americans. But it was blue nosed guy that came later.